]]>Difā-i-Qirā’āt, a masterpiece authored by the erudite scholar, Qārī Muḥammad Ṭāhir Raḥīmī al-Madanī (raḥimahullāh). The Urdu work, close to nine hundred pages long, is a detailed response to the feeble objections of a notorious hadith rejecter, Tamanna ‘Imadi (d. 1972), against the variant Qur’anic readings (qirā’āt). Although the work primarily focuses on the issue of qirā’āt, the author’s preface which underscores the factors behind ‘Imadi’s critical mindset and highlights some of his glaring errors, is strikingly relevant to people who display hadith-rejection tendencies at varying levels. The translation has been paraphrased in many places to enhance readability, whilst ensuring it remains faithful to both the content and the tenor adopted by the author.]

Introduction

All praise is for Allah, and peace be upon His chosen servants. To proceed:

The enemies of Islam have always been engaged, through many different means, in trying to create discord and stir doubts within Muslims regarding the primary source of Islamic legislation, the Noble Qur’an. Their primary purpose behind this is to make Muslims who are weak in faith renegade from Islam. What is even more unfortunate is that after the advent of European and German Orientalism in particular, some Muslim scholars have also become influenced by the veneering of such enemies, and ensnared in their trap of deception and lies. Instead of defending Islam, they then echo the opinions of the Orientalists and start to cast doubts regarding the Noble Qur’an, and through this approach of theirs, they cause more harm to Islam and Muslims than the actual enemies of Islam.

The poet says:

An ignorant person is not harmed by his enemies, as much he harms himself.

The objective of such people, either knowingly or unknowingly, is to dismantle and hollow out the foundations of Islam. However, Allah says:

They wish to blow out the Light of Allah with their mouths, and Allah rejects everything short of making His light perfect, no matter how the disbelievers may hate it.1Qur’an, 9:32

The light of Allah is sneering at the antics of disbelief. This lamp cannot be extinguished threw blowing.

The Topic of the Book

In this book, we have, with Allah’s grace, provided satisfactory, dumbfounding answers to some new objections to the variations in the Qur’anic readings (qirā’āt) and the seven ways (aḥruf). The critic who has raised these doubts declared the significant, mass-transmitted (mutawātir) hadith on the seven ways (aḥruf) to be fabricated, essentially lifting trust from all the predecessors of the Ummah through this heinous opinion.

No Sunni Muslim of sound belief, who possesses even a spark of knowledge and understanding, will be audacious enough to make such a statement. This musing can only be uttered by a total ignoramus devoid of even an iota of knowledge. But ironically, it seems this critic is aspiring to be the most learned man (‘allāmah) of the era and the next revivalist of the millennium (mujaddid-i-alf-i-thānī). It is beyond belief how he could make such an ignorant statement!

The First Major Mistake and the Critic’s Academic Prowess

Dear critic! The first mistake you made was to analogise the narrators of the qirā’āt to hadith narrators, despite there being a huge difference between the two. Investigating the narrators of a mass-transmitted (mutawātir) matter is not an objective in itself; it is merely of a secondary, supportive nature. In reality, a mutawātir matter will remain decisively-established. If there is any defect at any place in the chain, it will not be harmful at all. However, this is provided it is in fact a defect. It should not be that despite the clear text stating Aḥmad ibn Yazīd al-Ḥulwānī al-Muqri’ to be the student of Qālūn,2Lisān al-Mīzān, vol 1 pg 493 there is a refusal to accept him as such; or Aṣbahānī Abū Bakr, one of Warsh’s narrators, is misunderstood as Qutaybah ibn Mahrān Aṣbahānī, the student of Kisā’ī, and thus it is claimed that Aṣbahānī Abū Bakr is not a student of Warsh but rather of Kisā’ī! Similarly, the critic claims that Ibn Kathīr al-Makkī (b. 45 ah) was underage when ‘Abdullāh ibn al-Sā’ib (d. 65 ah) passed away, even though Ibn Kathīr was twenty years old at the time. Considering a twenty-year old to be underage is surely the literary marvel of this critic alone.

Moreover, the academic capability of an individual who makes grammatical, linguistic and contextual mistakes in translating Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī’s Arabic text, failing to grasp its basic meaning and making nonsensical points in the process, and who translates al-Dārī as “one who lives in Rayy”, is beyond our understanding; it is probably a form of divinely-gifted knowledge.

An anecdotal point of this most learned critic is that Haḍrat does not even know that authors sometimes refer to themselves in the third person, to reiterate the attribution of the respective work to themselves. Ibn Jarīr al-Ṭabarī writes on numerous occasions in his Qur’anic exegesis (tafsīr): “Abū Ja’far said”. The statement “Abū Dāwūd said” in Sunan Abī Dāwūd is very well-known. The erudite Ibn al-Jazarī says at the onset of his Ṭayyibat al-Nashr: “Muḥammad, namely Ibn al-Jazarī, said”. Even in the Noble Qur’an, in instances such as: “Allah said”, Allah has referred to Himself in the third person. In light of this, how did the critic deduce from the many instances of: “Abū ‘Amr al-Dānī said” in al-Taysīr that it is not even al-Dānī’s work?

Under the biography of ‘Abd al-Raḥmān ibn Hurmuz al-A’raj, the critic translates the word عرضًا in following statement:

وقال الداني روي عنه القراءة عرضًا نافع بن ابي نُعيْم

to mean listening to him from memory, whereas the correct translation is reading to him from memory. Truly such academic capability is to be commended!

Furthermore, whilst analysing the narrators of the qirā’āt, it was necessary to study the books dedicated to discussing these narrators. Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb, Lisān al-Mīzān and similar books are essentially books on hadith narrators. The mention of some reciters (qurrā’) who were also hadith narrators is incidental, and only with reference to their probity in narrating hadiths. The actual books specifically discussing qirā’āt narrators are Ma’rifat al-Qurrā’ al-Kibār of al-Dhahabī, Ṭabaqāt al-Qurrā’ of Ibn al-Jazarī, and so forth.

We will not be cynical and suggest that the critic had access to the biographical works on the reciters (qurrā’), was fully aware of their contents, but despite this purposefully avoided them. Instead, we will hold a good opinion and propose that he did not have these works at hand, and so his knowledge on qirā’āt narrators remained deficient. Nonetheless, in such circumstances his work cannot be called research or a fair critique. A researcher on any topic is obliged to obtain all books relevant to the topic he wishes to research and only then embark on his study. However, in this case, it seems that the critic had first formulated a wrong hypothesis regarding the qirā’āt. Thereafter, whatever he found against his hypothesis he chose to ignore, but whatever he felt could remotely support his idea, he included it immediately, without any hesitation and without any research.

The Second Mistake – Conflating Between Hadith and Qirā’āt

The second mistake you made is that when a reciter or qirā’āt narrator was declared weak by a hadith expert (muḥaddith) with respect to hadiths, you declared him to be weak in qirā’āt too. This is utterly absurd and unjust. A lack of expertise in one field does not at all necessitate a lack of expertise in other fields. If a proficient reciter (muqri’) were to declare a hadith expert to be weak in the field of qirā’āt, it would not mean the hadith expert is necessarily unaccomplished and inexpert in the field of hadith also.

The Third Mistake – Declaring the Qirā’āt Narrators to be Rafiḍīs3Ithna ‘Ashari Shias who hold, amongst other heretical beliefs, the belief that the Qur’an is distorted.

Thirdly, a fundamental error you made is to declare many qirā’āt narrators to be Rafiḍī, based on aberrant opinions or the statements of Rafiḍīs themselves, even though the Rafiḍīs do not spare even the Companions; how is it expected for them to spare the imams?!

In reality, the Rafiḍīs consider the different qirā’āt to be distortions, through which they substantiate the Qur’an being distorted. You have also deemed the different readings to be distortions, hence making it necessary to agree with the Rafiḍīs that the Qur’an is distorted – may Allah forbid. If the claim is wrong, the evidence is also wrong. And if the evidence is correct, the claim is also correct.

Furthermore, the Rafiḍīs also thought it an idea to class the Sunni narrators of qirā’āt to be Rafiḍīs, so that they become censurable and blameworthy amongst the Sunnis, thus losing credibility in their eyes. The consequence would be that Sunnis would conclude that these variant readings are wrong – may Allah forbid. Dear critic! You have either failed to understand this tactic of the Rafiḍīs, or else you have joined their ranks.

The Fourth Mistake – Deeming the Qirā’āt a Plot of Kufan Heretics

Fourthly, a grave error you made was to declare the variant readings (qirā’āt) to be the plot of the heretics of Kufa and their non-Arab emancipated slaves. And for the record, being an emancipated slave is an honour: Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) emancipated his adopted son, Zayd ibn Ḥārithah (raḍiallāhu ‘anhu), and also his son, Usāmah ibn Zayd (raḍiallāhu ‘anhu). It is the sheer magnificence of the Qur’an that it elevated the status of emancipated slaves who were non-Arabs.

All of the qirā’āt are part of the Qur’anic miracle. Let alone emancipated slaves, even prominent masters of eloquence amongst the Arabs were unable to present anything like the Qur’an, but here you are saying that emancipated slaves, and non-Arabs at that, concocted these seemingly miraculous readings? May Allah forbid! Can the Qur’anic miracle stay intact in this way? In this case, do Muslims have the right to say nobody has been able to present anything like the Qur’an until today?

In short, the nobility of the Qur’an is loftier than the nobility of lineage [i.e., the fact that prominent narrators of the qirā’āt were non-Arabs is of no relevance whatsoever]. This is why a righteous non-Arab scholar is considered commensurable (kuf’) for a girl of prophetic lineage.4Radd al-Muḥtār, vol 2 pg 323

As for the heretics and the Rafiḍīs of Kufa, they tried their utmost to efface the divinely-revealed qirā’āt and attempted to add a number of fabricated words to the Qur’an, e.g., bi wilāyat ‘aliyy.5 This is as claimed in their authentic, canonical works like Al-Kāfī. For example, verses 1-2 of Surah Ma’ārij are alleged to have originally been as follows, with the addition of bi wilāyat ‘aliyy: A supplicant asked about a punishment bound to happen [1]; to the disbelievers (of the authority of Ali: bi wilāyat ‘aliyy); of it there is no preventer [2]. Their campaign was to oppose the Qur’anic readings, distort the Qur’an and add fabricated words to it. On the other hand, the variations in the Qur’anic readings (qirā’āt) were divinely-revealed in Madinah Munawwarah; how then did the Rafiḍīs begin to disseminate them?

The Fifth Mistake – Claiming the Qirā’āt are Inauthentic

Fifthly, you made the mistake of deeming the mass-transmitted (mutawātir) readings as inauthentic. Let alone the differences in the vowelisation (i’rāb), letters and words of the Qur’anic readings, even the sounds of certain differences in the qirā’āt have been preserved as transmitted: how the imāla is done, what iẓhār sounds like, how the ghunna sound has been transmitted, how tashīl is articulated, and so forth. Nobody can introduce any change or distortion in these sounds, even in today’s age.

So, were previous ages worse than today’s contentious times? Was it possible that in previous times, let alone the sounds, even the vowelisation, letters and words were altered, whilst all the scholars, proficient reciters and jurist imams just watched like spectators?

The Sixth Mistake – Deeming the Hadith on the Seven Ways (Aḥruf) to be Fabricated

The sixth grave mistake you made is to declare the mass-transmitted, decisive hadith on the seven ways (aḥruf) to be fabricated – may Allah forbid! I don’t know in which book of fabricated narrations you came across this. Deeming something real as unreal is synonymous to saying day is night. All you had to do was provide a reference to establish this hadith is fabricated, or in the least, a weak hadith, so that your extensive reading could be praised. But the truth is this can never happen until the end of time. It is like a person saying he has decisive evidences to prove there is no city on earth called Makkah Mukarramah or Madinah Munawwarah. Without a doubt, such a person would be considered insane and mentally deranged. Use your head, and do not trivialise the authentic, mass-transmitted, divinely-revealed qirā’āt, all of which are narrated through unbroken chains.

The Underlying Factors Behind the Critic’s Mindset

The overall, general answer to the critic’s doubts is that the variations in qirā’āt are established through decisive, mass-transmitted narrations, and through the consensus and general acceptance of the Ummah. On the other hand, all of these doubts are merely fanciful and conjectural, and fanciful logical points are of no value when compared to that which is firmly-established.

The basis for these doubts, in fact the basis for the whole critical mindset of this critic, is founded on the following twelve principles:

Aberration and eccentricity.

Innovation

Declaring the whole ummah to be wrong and attempting to divide the whole nation.

Criticising and scathing all the pious predecessors, as a reflection of the hadith: “and the last of this ummah will curse the first of them”.

Discrediting authentic hadiths, solely on the basis of conjecture and speculation.

Discrediting the variations in the divinely-revealed Qur’anic readings (qirā’āt), out of following one’s based desires.

Distorting established realities to deem the real as unreal and vice versa, merely on the back of conjectural, fanciful ideas.

Adopting the track of the enemies of Islam, Rafiḍīs and Orientalists, instead of following the way of Islamic scholars.

Conceit, self-confidence, arrogance and excessive ignorance.

Strengthening the cause of hadith rejectors.

Poor knowledge of Arabic syntax (naḥw) and related sciences.

Conclusion

In the current era, most of the signs of end times have occurred. Amongst them is lack of knowledge, widespread ignorance and being opinionated. When heightened ignorance is compounded with criticising and attacking the predecessors, the intellect becomes impaired. The inevitable consequence of this is that such a person contorts the realities established by the Quran, Sunnah and affirmed history. In every place, the critic has, by virtue of his brilliant intellect, presented a masterfully innovated hypothesis, which is undoubtedly lifeless. Thereafter, anything which went against this hypothesis, be it regarding the variations in qirā’āt, hadith narrations or historical incidents, was unreservedly refuted by the critic. To add insult to injury, that which has been mass-transmitted and unanimously accepted throughout the ages by all the erudite scholars and reformers of the Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l-Jamā’ah, was declared unreliable and untrustworthy with one stroke of his pen. Whenever he chanced upon something from these people to support his hypothesis, he quickly latched onto it but rejected everything to the contrary. He did not stop here, but went a step ahead by labeling his own hypothesis the reality. And to Allah we complain.

Ithna ‘Ashari Shias who hold, amongst other heretical beliefs, the belief that the Qur’an is distorted.

4.

↑

Radd al-Muḥtār, vol 2 pg 323

5.

↑

This is as claimed in their authentic, canonical works like Al-Kāfī. For example, verses 1-2 of Surah Ma’ārij are alleged to have originally been as follows, with the addition of bi wilāyat ‘aliyy: A supplicant asked about a punishment bound to happen [1]; to the disbelievers (of the authority of Ali: bi wilāyat ‘aliyy); of it there is no preventer [2].

]]>https://www.basair.net/dr-akram-nadwi-denial-of-sihr/feed/2260Debunking Nahiem Ajmal’s Misquoting of Tahir Ibn ‘Ashur on the Beast https://www.basair.net/nahiem-ajmals-misquoting-ibn-ashur-beast/
https://www.basair.net/nahiem-ajmals-misquoting-ibn-ashur-beast/#commentsTue, 08 May 2018 15:00:43 +0000https://www.basair.net/?p=246When people become hellbent on proving their viewpoint to be true, no matter how ridiculous it may be, it is common to see them gleefully embrace any information that confirms their view but dismiss or undermine anything that contests it. For people of this bizarre disposition, or “confirmation bias” to be more precise, the internet …

]]>When people become hellbent on proving their viewpoint to be true, no matter how ridiculous it may be, it is common to see them gleefully embrace any information that confirms their view but dismiss or undermine anything that contests it. For people of this bizarre disposition, or “confirmation bias” to be more precise, the internet is an absolute goldmine, and “evidence” in support of the most preposterous arguments is just a few clicks away.

Nahiem Ajmal1aka Mufti Abu Layth al-Maliki, however, takes academic dishonesty to a different level altogether, where Googling to find a few dissenting opinions or ignoring an opposing view would not even be frowned upon. The former school-teacher relentlessly misquotes others and engages in what can only be labelled as woeful contextomy.

On the issue of the emergence of the Beast (dābba), one of the major signs of end times that is decisively proven from the Qur’an and authentic hadiths, Nahiem Ajmal purposefully misquotes the renowned Maliki exegete, Tahir ibn ‘Ashur (d. 1393). According to Nahiem Ajmal, Ibn ‘Ashur claims that the Beast will emerge on the Day of Judgment itself and not, as Muslims believe, before the Hour. He further claims on the authority of Ibn ‘Ashur that all the narrations on this topic are weak and unreliable.

Why Nahiem Ajmal is religiously devoted to distorting the consentient understanding of the Quran and Sunnah, who he seeks to appease with his academically-putrid methodology, and furthermore, why he feels nobody can detect his gross quoting-out-of-context are all discussions for another day. Here we will just show what Ibn ‘Ashur actually said and how Nahiem Ajmal, yet again, failed spectacularly in trying to put words into Ibn ‘Ashur’s mouth.

“…We will bring forth for them a creature from the earth speaking to them…”

After introducing Ibn ‘Ashur (rahimahullah) as: the Don of the Twentieth Century; the Legend; the Grand Mufti of the Malikiyya; the Shaykh al-Islam of the Twentieth Century; and “one of my indirect teachers who my chains of knowledge go through”, Nahiem Ajmal impresses upon his viewers that he is presenting Ibn ‘Ashur’s take on this issue, reinforcing this impression by passionately displaying the book and reading “directly” from it. But what Nahiem Ajmal forgets is that we have been taken down that route one time too many, and that we prudently live by the prophetic statement: “A believer is not bitten from the same hole twice”.2Bukhari, 6133, Muslim 2998

Nahiem Ajmal begins by talking about verses 80-81 of Surah al-Naml, which ironically mention how guidance does not benefit those who are blind and deaf to the truth. Thereafter, coming to the crux of the matter, Nahiem Ajmal presents his musings on the following verse which mentions the Beast:

“And when the word befalls them, We will bring forth for them a creature from the earth speaking to them, [saying] that the people were, of Our verses, not certain [in faith].” (Qur’an, 27:82)

Nahiem Ajmal’s “Interpretation”

Taking a cursory look at how Nahiem Ajmal explains 27:82 and comparing it to what Ibn ‘Ashur actually said really hits home how academic propriety is a concept foreign to Ajmal.

In explaining 27:82, Ajmal says:

“When the command has been established, when the matter has been resolved, when it has happened…this is what Allah is saying…that this matter has now been resolved. When is Allah talking about? When is everything resolved? It’s in the afterlife…We at that stage will bring forth for them a creature. This creature…this creature will strangely address them that they used to disbelieve in these signs, that Allah will give life to this inanimate creature to show them this is how we bring the dead to life.”

Nahiem Ajmal is claiming that the bringing forth of the Beast will occur in the afterlife when “the matter has been resolved”, as opposed to before the Hour, and with the purpose of showing people how Allah brings the dead to life.

The Purpose of the Beast According to Nahiem Ajmal

Before looking at what Ibn ‘Ashur actually said, an obvious question here that highlights the ludicrous nature of Ajmal’s claim is why Allah would need to present an inanimate creature, on the Day of Judgment of all days, to show people how He brings the dead to life! Each and every person ever to have stepped foot on earth will rise from his or her grave, so what further evidence is required to show how Allah revives? This will be a self-evident truth, which every denier of the Resurrection will have no choice but to accept on that day.

Allah says:

“And the Horn will be blown; and at once from the graves to their Lord they will hasten. They will say, ‘O woe to us! Who has raised us up from our sleeping place?’” (Qur’an, 36:51-52)

He says elsewhere:

“Their eyes humbled, they will emerge from the graves as if they were locusts spreading” (Qur’an, 54:7)

Ibn ‘Ashur’s Commentary

Moving on to Ibn ‘Ashur’s full text, it is not at all surprising to see that it reveals quite a different narrative to that presented by Nahiem Ajmal.

Firstly, Nahiem Ajmal translated the beginning of the verse: “when the word (qawl) befalls (waqa’a) them” as: “the matter has been resolved”, explaining this to mean once everything has been settled in the afterlife.

In his magnus opus commentary Al-Tahrir wa ’l-Tanwir, Ibn ‘Ashur says that qawl refers to the accounts of the Hour they used to deny.3Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 20, pg 38 As for waqa’a, which Nahiem Ajmal translates as “resolved” and “established”, Ibn ‘Ashur says it refers allegorically to the onset of the Hour, which is from the time the world begins to draw to an end until people enter their ultimate destination in either Paradise or Hell.4Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 20, pg 38

To cut it short, Ibn ‘Ashur is not entertaining, even for a moment, that this is referring to after “the matter has been resolved”, but in fact says the beginning of this time is when the world comes close to the end of its temporal existence. The emergence of the Beast, being one of the major and last signs before the Hour, sits perfectly with the time frame Ibn ‘Ashur has highlighted.

Nahiem Ajmal will, quite predictably, assert his right to interpret Ibn ‘Ashur the way he has claimed, but Ibn ‘Ashur himself leaves no room for Ajmal’s venturesome misinterpretation, and clearly sets the context:

“The verse is indicating towards one of the signs of the onset of the threat they were warned of, which is the greatest threat, i.e., the threat of resurrection. Thus, it is indicating towards one of the signs of the Hour that is part of the supernatural (khawāriq al-‘ādāt).”5Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 20, pg 38

Unless the word “sign” has an esoteric meaning which we are unaware of and which Nahiem Ajmal can kindly share with us, Ibn ‘Ashur has made it very clear that the emergence of the Beast is a supernatural sign that will transpire before the Hour. Hence, the only thing that makes sense in all of Nahiem Ajmal’s explanation is why he would choose not to cite the abovementioned text, which proves “unequivocally” that Ibn ‘Ashur does not interpret the Beast except as a sign before end times. Nahiem Ajmal has a knack for misquoting, but with Allah’s grace and ability, our knack to pinpoint his academic dishonesty is just as good, if not better. And all praise is for Allah.

Did Ibn ‘Ashur say the verse is speaking about the Beast emerging in the Afterlife?

Nahiem Ajmal says:

“Ibn ‘Ashur says that this is speaking about the Akhirah this beast. He says (Arabic text) this now moves on to a remembrance of the Day of Judgment and what has been held for them as a kind of intimidation. He says this is attached to the sentence before it.”

This is the text of Ibn ‘Ashur which Nahiem Ajmal quotes:

هذا انتقال إلى التذكير بالقيامة وما ادخر لهم من الوعيد

This is moving towards reminding of the Day of Judgment and the threat which has been reserved for them.6Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 20, pg 38

Naheim Ajmal, in his trademark prevarication, slips in the words “this beast” to imply that Ibn ‘Ashur is saying the Beast will emerge in the hereafter, whereas Ibn ‘Ashur has not even commented on the Beast at this point. Ibn ‘Ashur writes the text above immediately after citing 27:82, merely stating that the verses from this point onward are now focusing on the Day of Judgment and its events. The discussion on the Beast begins two paragraphs later, and in its own clear-cut context as one of the signs before the Hour. Again, it does not take a brain surgeon to work out how Nahiem Ajmal is misquoting Ibn ‘Ashur.

Another Gross Misinterpretation

After fast-forwarding past a few important paragraphs, Nahiem Ajmal continues:

“Now, then he goes on to say here. He says (Arabic text) He says this is because they used to deny the afterlife. And there is no doubt that the speech of this Beast to them…is an address…it is upon the occurrence of the Day of Judgment…the day Allah gathers everybody.”

The Arabic text Nahiem Ajmal selectively quoted, and translated even more selectively, is as follows:

“Taking the creature out from the earth is to show them how Allah will revive the dead, as they had denied the resurrection. There is no doubt that its speaking to them is to address them regarding [not upon, as Ajmal states] the onset of the gathering (hashr).”7Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 20, pg 39

So, did Ibn ‘Ashur say the Beast will speak to them upon the occurrence of the Day of Judgment? How can Allah show the people how He will revive the dead if the Beast is brought after they have already been resurrected? There are numerous objections to Nahiem Ajmal’s illogical and untenable spin on this issue, but this much is enough for sincere readers. As for crooked minds, even the right things get crooked in them, as we have witnessed on so many occasions.

Moreover, it is important Ibn ‘Ashur is allowed to speak for himself and not put into a straitjacket and gagged by Nahiem Ajmal. Explaining why the Beast will speak, Ibn ‘Ashur says that it will be a means of belittling the people and making them regret their indifference to the profound truth of the Qur’an that had come to them through the best of Allah’s creation, the Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). This will be a form of humiliation for them at the end of time, i.e., close to the Hour, for which they will be taunted on the plain of resurrection: it will be said that these are the people who turned away from the words of the Noble Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wasallam), so they were addressed by a mute animal.8Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 20, pg 39

The statement: ‘that the people were, of Our verses, not certain’ states the cause for this supernatural act, as the polytheists did not believe in the verses of the Qur’an, so this was done to coerce them [into belief] when it will not benefit them.9Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 20, pg 39

The meaning is that it will record against the people, i.e., the polytheists, their nonacceptance of the verses of Allah. This recording will be to rebuke and make them regret, because at that time, the word: “no soul will benefit from its faith who had not brought faith before” will have befallen them.10Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 20, pg 39

Ibn ‘Ashur cites Qur’an 6:158 to substantiate that after the emergence of the Beast, nobody’s acceptance of Islam will be accepted. This is also stated in a hadith of Sahih Muslim (198).

As a final nail in the coffin for Nahiem Ajmal’s argument, it will be appropriate to relate what Ibn ‘Ashur stated in commentary of the verse: “The Day that some of the signs of your Lord will come no soul will benefit from its faith that had not believed before or had earned through its faith some good” (Qur’an 6:158).

Ibn ‘Ashur says that procrastination in the matter of accepting faith is extremely perilous, lest a time comes when it is too late to make amends and repent. This is either at the time of death, or when one of Allah’s supernatural signs of punishment descends, after which repentance is of no avail.11Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 8, pg 186

He then states:

Amongst the signs of Allah are the signs Allah has made for people in general, and they are the signs of the Hour, one of them being the sun rising from the West.12Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 20, pg 39

In very explicit terms, Ibn ‘Ashur is referring to the signs of the Hour and these supernatural signs of punishment (amongst them the emergence of the Beast), as the point after which faith and repentance will not be accepted of a person. This is before the Hour, not on the Day of Judgment. Thus far, Nahiem Ajmal has only been able to show any disparity between Ibn ‘Ashur’s belief and that of Muslims by misquoting and distorting; once his academic improbity is denuded, it is evident how Ibn ‘Ashur’s belief is harmonious with the decisive belief of the Qur’an and Sunnah.

Did Ibn ‘Ashur say all Hadiths on the Beast are Weak and Unreliable?

As a last gasp to support his dying argument, Nahiem Ajmal wraps up this episode with a claim in Ibn ‘Ashur’s name that the hadiths on this topic are all weak.

Ajmal says:

“This is what he says and then he mentions…there are many narrations that are speaking about this creature coming, when it will come, how it will come at the end of time, how it will come on this earth, he says all of them are mudtarib, they all are clashing, unreliable narrations, these are weak, weak narrations, he says you can see in the Tafsir of Qurtubi…there isn’t even any benefit in bringing them and criticising them. That’s how unreliable they are. So that is the legend, Ibn Ashur explaining to you that the dābbat al-arḍ is a creature…which will come…on the Day of Judgment as the Qur’an addresses it. It is not talking about it in this dunyā. Some people may like to believe that it’s going to happen in this dunyā. That’s their choice. It’s their belief. Although the Qur’an seems to address this as though it’s speaking about the afterlife. And that is what Ibn Ashur, the legend, the Shaykh al-Islam of the Twentieth Century and the grand mufti of the Malikiyya addresses, and that’s what I am in line with.”

“Regarding the description of this creature, and the time and place of its emergence, confused (mudhtarib) and weak-chained hadiths have been narrated. Check them in Tafsir al-Qurtubi and other books, as there is no benefit in citing them and scrutinising them.”13Al-Tahrir wa’l-Tanwir, Vol 20, pg 39

Nahiem Ajmals’ hyperbolic tone and translation, with added emphasis when pronouncing da’if, does not change the reality of what Ibn ‘Ashur said here, nor does it abrogate all his clear statements in the very same discussion which affirm the emergence of Beast as a sign of the Hour. Ibn ‘Ashur has acknowledged the weakness of certain narrations regarding the Beast, but that in no way implies he denies its very existence. The same can be ascertained from Tafsir al-Qurtubi to which Ibn ‘Ashur has referred readers.

It is also important to note that Ibn ‘Ashur did not say all the narrations are weak and clashing, as Ajmal has quoted. Ajmal’s use of the word “all” when translating Ibn ‘Ashur’s text is almost as tragicomical as his saying “some” people believe that the Beast will emerge in this life.

But this is nothing new or unexpected from Nahiem Ajmal, nor would it surprise us if after getting caught misquoting again, he were to relegate Ibn ‘Ashur from being the legend, shaykh al-Islam, grand mufti and so forth, to just being a later Maliki scholar. It happened with ‘Alusi previously. In fact, he even did an official handover and told us to “keep Alusi”, who was once a legend and now just a “later Hanafi scholar”.

Conclusion

Contrary to what Nahiem Ajmal tried to prove, Ibn ‘Ashur clearly believes the emergence of the Beast to be a sign before the Hour, as decisively established in the Qur’an and Sunnah, and there is nothing in Ibn ‘Ashur’s texts which would even indicate that the Beast’s emergence will be in the afterlife on the Day of Judgment.

There is no plausible reason why Nahiem Ajmal engages in such blatant misquoting without fear of being unmasked, but that is not a worry we have to take on board, and it seems Nahiem Ajmal is not losing sleep over it either. As Charlie Chaplin said, “Failure is unimportant. It takes courage to make a fool of yourself.”

May Allah guide us all and grant us conviction in Him and His Messenger. Peace and blessings be on him, his family, his companions and all who follow their way in excellence. Amin.

]]>https://www.basair.net/nahiem-ajmals-misquoting-ibn-ashur-beast/feed/4246Music and the Qur’anic Recitationhttps://www.basair.net/music-quranic-recitation/
https://www.basair.net/music-quranic-recitation/#commentsWed, 31 May 2017 03:50:50 +0000https://www.basair.net/?p=118An Excerpt from Khalid Baig’s Slippery Stone [Hereunder is a section from Khalid Baig’s exceptionally comprehensive work on the topic of music, Slippery Stone. In this particular section, the author has concisely highlighted the disturbing blurring of lines between correct recitation of the Qur’ān and talhīn, the act of making the Qur’ānic recitation conform to musical rules. This …

]]>An Excerpt from Khalid Baig’s Slippery Stone
[Hereunder is a section from Khalid Baig’s exceptionally comprehensive work on the topic of music, Slippery Stone. In this particular section, the author has concisely highlighted the disturbing blurring of lines between correct recitation of the Qur’ān and talhīn, the act of making the Qur’ānic recitation conform to musical rules. This is a predicament that is evident at its pinnacle in the Egyptian Qur’ānic recitation scene. Owing to the lucid manner in which Khalid Baig has addressed this issue, this section is being reproduced here with his permission. May Allah Most High reward him immensely and grace this humble effort with acceptance and benefit. Āmīn.]

Music and the Qur’ānic Recitation

The recitation of the inimitable words of the Qur’ān has always been an unmatched moving experience for countless people who have turned their attention to it. It makes people’s hearts tremble with the awe and fear of Allah. It causes them to cry. It forces them to fall in prostration. A good voice and command over the rules of tajwīd enhance these effects. At the same time there has always been a possibility that some people will get carried away and cross the barrier between Qur’ānic recitation and talhīn, or singing. Thus scholars have always been cautioning us against it. They have been pointing out that while the Qur’ān does command its readers to recite it with tartīl, that should not be translated into talhīn. Tartīl means reading it slowly, pronouncing every word clearly, following the rules of tajwīd, and reflecting on it. It leads to the fear of Allah. Talhīn on the other hand, aims at enjoyment and entertainment. The two are not only different but are mutually exclusive.

As Qārī ‘Abd al-Bāsit ‘Abd al-Samad (d. 1408/1988) points out one can follow either the rules of tajwīd or those of talhīn:

When a person attempts to follow the rules of music for any musical note in the recitation of a Qur’ānic verse, it is a given that he will violate the rules of tajwīd. And if he decides to follow the rules of tajwīd, it is a given that he will violate the rules of music. [1]

Shaykh Muhammad Khātir ((1. 1416/1995), the late Mufti of Egypt, explains why talhīn is so problematic. It works at cross purposes to the Qur’an:

“Talhīn distorts the words of the Qur’ān, negates their purpose, and turns people away from reflecting on its verses, to focusing on the intonation that accompanies it.”[2]

The musical tones become a replacement for the Words they are supposed to embellish. Talhīn is thus a virtual addition to the text as Shaykh Mahmūd Khalīl al-Husarī points out:

“Tajwīd spurts from the Qur’ān and talhīn is an addition to it. If we were to permit it, then adding words to the Qur’an will also be permissible.”[3]

The whole discussion has been summarized beautifully and eloquently by Shaykh ‘Abd al-Wahhāb al-Sha‘rāni in a Sufi pledge:

To those of our friends who would listen to us we should stop them from reciting the Qur’ān in modes that are against the rules delineated by the pious predecessors. This also applies to giving the adhān and saying the takbīr[4] behind the imām.[5]

He explains that it violates the rules of tajwīd and is harām. He then points out why talhīn destroys an act of worship.

When the imām focuses on modes and singing, then he loses consciousness of being in the presence of Allah; the thing that is most important in salah is lost . . . When the Prophet (sallallāhu alayhi wasallam) said, “Beautify the Qur’ān with your voice, it meant pronouncing every letter properly and beautifully, as is the practice of the masters of recitation. It did not mean singing in the manner of love songs.[6]

The Qur’ānic recitation is a serious act of worship and devotion; it is not for entertainment. Like all other acts of worship it must follow the way prescribed by the Sharī‘ah. A qārī must recite the Qur’ān the way its recitation has been received by disciples from their teachers all through the centuries, which was free of talhīn.[7] This is necessary not only for preserving the purity of worship, but it also has had other great blessings associated with it. Just as the Qur’ān is the great unifying Book for the Ummah, its recitation has also been a tremendously unifying act. No matter where a qārī comes from and whether or not he can speak a word of Arabic in normal conversation, his recitation will faithfully copy the approved recitation as preserved in both books of tajwīd and an unshakable oral tradition.

However today the pressures built by the prevalence of music are changing that. In Egypt, for example, there has been a visible and disturbing move toward unifying Qur’ānic recitation with music. Nelson mentions a musician Zakariyyā Ahmad who planned to compose music for the Qur’ān with the aim of evoking the meanings. He built his case by giving an example. Once he heard a reciter, “who evoked such a temptingly beautiful image of Hell-fire” that he burst out: “If Hell is so lovely and pleasant, take me to it.”[8] This response speaks volumes about the mindset of the musician. For at that time the qārī was reciting the following verses describing the torments of Hell that ought to make one tremble with fear:

And what can let you know What Saqar is? It neither spares (anything inside it from burning) nor leaves (any disbeliever outside). It will disfigure the skins. Appointed over it are nineteen wardens.[9]

A person who finds this attractive is of course not listening to the words, only to the sounds, through his thoroughly distorted hearing. This is what Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qādir ‘Atā’ lamented about the new Qur’ānic recitation scene in Egypt. He said:

What are we witnessing in Egypt today in the gatherings of people around a qārī who engages in talhīn? What we hear from the shouts and noises asking for a repetition affirms that these masses are not asking for a repeat of and are not delighted with anything but music and singing. As for the Qur’ān, they are totally isolated from it. They scream with delight equally when they hear the verses of admonishment or the verses of reward. They make no difference between the verses talking about Hell and those talking about Heaven. In this act there is such disrespect for the Qur’ān that calls for prohibition of such listening and attendance of such gatherings.[10]

[4] This refers to the arrangement in large congregations before the advent of loud speakers. The designated repeaters throughout the congregation would repeat the takbīr of the imām to signal transition to the next salah position. The same system is used today if the speakers fail during the salah and as a precaution in the salah at the Haram.

[Translator’s Foreword: Hereunder is a translation of a concise treatise Husn-i-Qira’at par Ta’reef ki No’iyyat, authored by Mufti Rasheed Ahmad Fareedi (hafizahullah), a teacher at Madrasah Miftah al-Ulum (Taraj, India). The author has succinctly explained that it is permissible to express praise and acclaim a reciter (qari) of the Noble Qur’an for his good recitation, but this should only be done after the recitation has been concluded, and not at every instance of the qari pausing. He has specifically scrutinised the recent practice of the compere or M.C. at Qur’an recital gatherings expressing praise for the recitation during the pauses (waqf) in the recitation.

This treatise is extremely pertinent to one amongst many discrepancies the ever-growing trend of Qur’anic recitation gatherings, predominantly associated with Egyptian reciters, carries in its fold. Alongside being a breach of the etiquette of listening to the Noble Qur’an, the frenzied manner in which the audience usually applaud the qari in such gatherings is a symptom of entertainment being the primary objective in this heavily-promoted Qur’anic recitation scene.

Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Ata states:

“What we are witnessing in Egypt today in the gatherings of people around a qari who engages in talhin?[1] What we hear from the shouts and noises asking for a repetition affirms that these masses are not asking for a repeat of and are not delighted with anything but music and singing. As for the Qur’an, they are totally isolated from it. They scream with delight equally when they hear the verses of admonishment or the verses of reward. They make no difference between the verses talking about Hell and those talking about Heaven. In this act there is such disrespect for the Qur’an that calls for prohibition of such listening and attendance of such gatherings.” (Slippery Stone, pg. 270)

May Allah enable us to fulfil the rights of the Noble Qur’an, and make it a proof for us, not against us, on the Day of Judgement. Aamin.]

In the name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Ever-Merciful.

Introduction

We praise Allah and send blessings on His Noble Messenger. To proceed:

There are many aspects of etiquette for the Noble Qur’an, one important aspect being to listen to its recitation attentively and remain silent. The command in the verse: “So when the Qur’an is recited, then listen to it and be silent that you may receive mercy”[2] denotes incumbency (wujub) in salah and during the sermon (khutbah). In other cases, where there is one person in a gathering who is reciting whilst others listen, listening carefully and remaining silent is a right of the Qur’an and an emphasised point of etiquette. It is for this reason that the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) would listen very attentively whenever the Noble Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) recited the Noble Qur’an to them. One on occasion, he recited the whole of Surah al-Rahman to them and they all remained silent. From this it is understood that it is a right of the Noble Qur’an to listen to it attentively and remain silent when it is being recited.

The Proof for Approving and Acclaiming a Good Recitation

It has been reported that the Noble Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) listened to the recitation of the Noble Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) and also approved and praised them after they had recited.

In the famous incident of Sayyiduna Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) taking Sayyiduna Hisham (may Allah be pleased with him) to the Noble Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and complaining that he was reading differently to the way Sayyiduna Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) had been taught, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) first asked Sayyiduna Hisham (may Allah be pleased with him) to recite. After he had recited, the Noble Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “This is how it was revealed.” He then told Sayyiduna Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) to read, after which he said the same words: “This is how it was revealed.”[3] This was a case of approving differences in readings (qira’at).

The Noble Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) heard the recitation of Sayyiduna Abu Musa al-Ash’ari (may Allah be pleased with him) and praised him afterwards, saying, “You have been granted one of the beautiful voices of Dawud.”[4]

Sayyiduna Abdullah ibn Mas’ood (may Allah be pleased with him) once recited Surah Yusuf to a gathering of people in Homs. One of the people (found to be drunk afterwards) objected to his recitation. Sayyiduna Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with him) said, “By Allah, I recited it to Allah’s Messenger (may Allah bless him and send peace on him) and he said to me, ‘You have read well (ahsanta).’”[5]

Both of these narrations show acclaim of a good recitation. In short, praising correct and good recitation is established from authentic narrations.

In 1395 AH (1975 AD), a large conference presided by the great hadith scholar Hazrat Mawlana Habib al-Rahman A’zami (rahimahullah) was held in Jamiah Islamiyah, Dabhel, upon the arrival of the Grand Shaykh of Azhar (Cairo, Egypt). The conference was initiated with the recitation of the head qira’ah teacher, Hazrat Mawlana Qari Ahmadullah Bhagalpuri (may his shadow be lengthened). After the recitation, the Grand Shaykh of Azhar said, “You read well (ahsanta).”

The Correct Timing for Praise and Maintaining Distinction from Poetry Recitals

From the above hadiths and also the incident cited, it is clear that approving or praising the reciter’s good recitation should be at the conclusion of the recitation. However, if the listener is genuinely affected by the good recitation and ends up saying “Allah” or “SubhanAllah” or “MashaAllah” [or similar phrases] when the reciter pauses, there is no harm in this.

[What the author has noted here as exceptional circumstances is clearly different to what was quoted from Shaykh ‘Abd al-Qadir ‘Ata in the foreword.]

Furthermore, it is permissible to point out mistakes during the recitation for the sake of correcting, as is the case when one is teaching or studying.

But when the objective is merely to recite and listen to the Qur’an, it is contrary to [the Qur’anic order of] insaat, i.e., remaining silent, to say words of praise, encouragement and supplication [for the reciter] during the recitation. It is perhaps for this reason that even forbidding wrong is prohibited during the sermon (khutbah).

Today, in the gatherings of Qur’anic recitation, when the reciter pauses during his recitation, and at times even before he has paused, the compere or M.C. begins showering praise and encouragement very openly on the microphone, and all of this is done purposefully and very artificially.

It seems this style of praise has been imported from poetry recitals, in which poems and sonnets are read. As the meanings of the poems are generally understood by the listeners, and out of being elated by the poet’s enthralling poetry, accolades of praise are received as soon as the verse of poetry has finished, and at times, even before it has been completed. The poet also looks forward to receiving such praise.

This behavior is considered praiseworthy and a mark of respect in poetry recitals. However, the Qur’an is the word of Allah and gatherings of Qur’anic recitation should be distinct from poetry recitals. The decorum of Qur’anic recitation is to listen attentively and remain silent whilst it is being recited. Even the moments in which the reciter pauses are considered part of the overall recitation. For this reason, if one cannot hear the sound of the recitation, remaining silent is nonetheless necessary. Thus, the practice of praising, encouraging and supplicating for the reciter, as is becoming customary, is a breach of etiquette and a digression from the way of the pious elders. Moreover, the prohibition of rowdiness during the recitation is also established from the verse: “And those who disbelieved said, ‘Do not listen to this Qur’an, and make noise during its recitation, so that you may overcome.”[6]

[From the above, the ruling regarding shouting takbeer, chants of praise when the reciter demonstrates his breath-power or his command over tune (especially in the midst of a verse), and Mexican-wave style motions, is quite evident]

Refraining from the Customary Manner of Praising

One of the harms of this customary manner of praising and encouraging is that as soon as one hears the loud acclaim of the M.C., the effect of the recitation, which was divinely created in the heart and which was potentially a cause for further zeal towards the Qur’an and guidance, finishes immediately. Once the reciter carries on with his recitation and the audience listens attentively, once again a spiritual connection is made. However, the loud interjection of the M.C. when the reciter pauses overcomes the listeners’ condition yet again and they are deprived of the spirituality they should have experienced through listening to the Qur’anic recitation.

In conclusion, praise of the reciter’s recitation, and words of encouragement and supplication are permissible. However, this should be at the conclusion of the recitation and not before, and the manner of praising which is coming in vogue, similar to that of poetry recitals, should be stopped totally.